Re: [Cfrg] adopting Argon2 as a CFRG document

I believe that we would see a sort of response to this challenge from argon suthors soon. It is quite natural to adjust security proofs yo the new techniques
Cheers,
Grigory
--
Отправлено из Mail.Ru для Android пятница, 29 января 2016г., 00:53 +0300 от Paul Grubbs < pag225@cornell.edu> :

>Would it be out of the question to ask the authors of Argon2 (or anybody, really) to do a more formal analysis of its space-hardness? It would be nice to have a proof (e.g. based on pebbling arguments) of some kind of time-space tradeoff for Argon2. 
>
>On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 3:39 PM, Grigory Marshalko  < marshalko_gb@tc26.ru > wrote:
>>Indeed, the PHC competition has significantly contributed to the design and analysis of password-hashing schemes. It's a nice mixture of crypto and engineering. So it would be desirable to wait until we understand the limits of attacks and corresponding countermeasures.
>>The article on baloon hashing is a significant step forward for understanding these issues.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Grigory Marshalko,
>>expert,
>>Technical committee for standardisation "Cryptography and security mechanisms" (ТC 26)
>>www.tc26.ru
>>22 января 2016 г., 22:31, "Paterson, Kenny" < Kenny.Paterson@rhul.ac.uk > написал:
>>> Mike,
>>>
>>> Thanks. The authors of the Argon2 design may in due course tweak their
>>> design to avoid the identified problems, or argue that they are not
>>> sufficiently worrisome to warrant a change to the design.
>>>
>>> We definitely need to factor this in to our deliberations, and we will
>>> take the time to do so. Let's see how it plays out...
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Kenny
>>>
>>> On 22/01/2016 19:20, "Mike Hamburg" < mike@shiftleft.org > wrote:
>>>
>>>> We might want to hold off on Argon2 — at least on finalizing it — until
>>>> the team has
>>>> responded to (and hopefully mitigated) the issues mentioned at
>>>>  https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/027 . Essentially the problem is that Argon2
>>>> can be computed
>>>> in less space than advertised. The team said that they are planning a
>>>> response, cf
>>>>  http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.security.phc/3606
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> — Mike
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 22, 2016, at 11:10 AM, Paterson, Kenny < Kenny.Paterson@rhul.ac.uk >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear CFRG,
>>>>
>>>> Having received limited feedback either way from the group (specifically,
>>>> one voice in favour), the CFRG chairs have decided to adopt
>>>>  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-josefsson-argon2-00 as a CFRG document.
>>>>
>>>> If you have objections or concerns, please reply to this email or directly
>>>> to CFRG chairs.
>>>>
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>
>>>> Kenny Paterson (for the chairs)
>>>>
>>>> On 06/11/2015 11:47, "Paterson, Kenny" < Kenny.Paterson@rhul.ac.uk > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Stephen,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, the chairs are amenable to this. We've been keeping an eye on the
>>>> password hashing competition and were planning a work item in this area.
>>>>
>>>> Any comments from the group, either supporting or objecting to us adopting
>>>> this draft in the RG?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Kenny
>>>>
>>>> (for the chairs)
>>>>
>>>> On 06/11/2015 02:18, "Cfrg on behalf of Stephen Farrell"
>>>> < cfrg-bounces@irtf.org on behalf of
>>>>  stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The password hashing competition has a winner and some folks
>>>> in the openpgp wg are interested in using that winner. I guess
>>>> this might be better processed via cfrg if folks are amenable
>>>> to that.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> S.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Cfrg mailing list
>>>>  Cfrg@irtf.org
>>>>  https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Cfrg mailing list
>>>  Cfrg@irtf.org
>>>  https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Cfrg mailing list
>>Cfrg@irtf.org
>>https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
>